Gender neutral tees

prawnsambo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118126603#Comment_118126603

I'm not familiar with the Norwegian system, but I wonder did handicaps differ significantly. If you take the woman golfer above who said she's off scratch, that handicap would have been achieved playing off tees rated and parred for women and based on different criteria than for men. So if she switched to playing off tees rated for men and using those ratings, her handicap index would go up quite a bit.

prawnsambo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118128792#Comment_118128792

Never mind, found it. This is not what we were talking about. In fact I said it a few times although redesignation of tees and possibly changing the colour of 'red' tees or just referring to them by length have been suggested. But this is nothing to do with handicap golf or competition golf, it's just aimed at casual golfers who would pay green fees and play a round from whatever tees suit them.

It's even referred to in the rules of golf by the R&A here. The last paragraph refers to what I've been saying about ratings.

https://twitter.com/HartfordGolfC/status/1455492895033679876?s=20

The Big Easy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118128827#Comment_118128827

But isn't that the whole point, your play dictates your handicap not your gender or the tee.

If a lady wants to play off the whites, their handicap would adjust accordingly and if a man wants to play off the reds his handicap would adjust accordingly.

Like others I don't know why the course has to described differently. You say the courses have different para and different pars on certain holes. But if you just play the course that the tees dictate and your handicap adjusts accordingly.

I thought that was the whole point of WHS to allow more accessability for all and if it's not, what exactly was the point of all this change. If an above average length woman wants to play the white or back tees this should be the mechanism that allows them. Likewise if a below average or ageing male wants to play the reds.

prawnsambo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118133736#Comment_118133736

The point of the WHS was to have the same handicapping system for the whole world.

The current rating and par systems are separated by gender. They could be combined, but if so, it's very unlikely that you'd have more than a handful of women scratch golfers. Even pro women golfers play on shorter courses than man. Usually in the region of 700-1000 yards shorter. Nelly Korda drives the ball on average about 275 yards. Bryson De Chambeau averages around 325. Those are the longest drivers on their respective tours.

joebloggs32

If the ladies played off the whites then their hsndicap index would reflect the incressed distance involved.

To play devil's advocate though, should the current distances for determining ladies par3, par 4 etc be applied as it would be important to establish this for stableford scoring.

On a slightly related topic, I heard of a club nearby that this year allowed their over 70s members play off their green tees with the relevant playing handicap while the rest of the competitors had to play off the back sticks in the Captain's prize!

prawnsambo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118133886#Comment_118133886

I don't think they'd get the required benefit from the rating. For example our yellows are about 800 yards longer than our reds. The slope ratings are 125 and 123 respectively. So a woman playing the yellows off a handicap index of 20 would not get any extra shots from what she would have from the reds.

And in there on the yellows is a par 4 that would become a par 5 if rated for women based on the latest handicapping manual. So there would be a few adjustments probably depending on the length of the individual holes and also holes that required carries like over rivers or other hazards.

I see no problem with that approach. Our open comps can be won by either gender. You get the most points, you win.

Ivefoundgod

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118133836#Comment_118133836

I would tend to agree with a lot of your posts on this thread but this one I don't really get. Nelly Korda averaging 275 yards would likely put her in with the longest of hitters in your average golf club and while I appreciate that the majority of women golfers are unlikely to have anywhere close to her distance I don't really see that as reason to not allow ladies play off mens tees? Might be missing something there though.

EDIT: as I read that back I assume your point is that there's a 50 yard gap between Nelly and Bryson, is that replicated in amateur/club golf?

IMO I would be more in favour of some males playing off the forward and some ladies of the middle tees (based on ability/distance) I just think it would improve the experience for all levels of golfer. A scratch lady could play off the middle tees with a handicap of 5/6 or whatever it might be and be competitive(still would still allow a shorter hitting lady to play off her normal handicap off the forward tees if the distance is an issue) while a 25-30 handicapper male can play off the forward tees with a 20 handicap. It would allow players who have no chance of parring some holes actually par a hole which regardless of your level is a nice thing IMO.

spacecoyote

I think a few people here are fundamentally missing the point prawnsambo is making.

He's not saying that men can't play the reds, or women cant played the whites, he's saying that, in order to do so, you have to have separate sets of ratings and slopes for men and women based on the actualu guidelines that are in place from the Golf authorities.

Using my own course as an example, and using myself as a sample player.

I could play the blues on my home course.

Index 8.9

Slope 129

Yardage 6800

Par 72

Course rating 72.9

Which would give me 10 shots

Or i could play the reds (going by the current ladies taings, as they are the only one available)

Index 8.9

Slope 132

Yardage 5700

Par 74

Course rating 74.3

Which would give me 10 shots again. So I'd have the same handicap playing a course with 2 more strokes for a level par round and over 1000 yards shorter.

And a man win a higher index than mine could actually have a higher PH off the reds than the blues.

So, yes, it can be done, but the course needs to be rated accordingly to allow for it in practice

prawnsambo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118134326#Comment_118134326

That's exactly it.

Your example is exactly what I'm getting at. I gave the other side above. But if I was to take our back tees as an example as you did, but for women, and based on a 20 index (I'm choosing that index as it shows the difference in playing handicaps better) a woman who would have 21 playing handicap off the red tees would have just 23 off the back tees. Two extra shots on a course that is now 2000 yards longer.

And looking at it the other way around, a man who could play to his handicap off the back tees would only lose two shots playing off a 2000 yard shorter course if he played from the red tees.

@Ivefoundgod Yes, that's the point I'm making. 50 yards a hole adds up to the guts of 1000 yards over the entire course. And that's pretty much the average difference between the tours in terms of course length. Is it replicated in amateur golf? I would say yes on average. I've played with women who could carry their drives about 180-190 yards in summer conditions. Others who would maybe get 150 in the air. I wouldn't know what the average is, but I assume that the tables for pars issued in the handicap manual is based on that.

Par72

My argument is that there shouldn't be different course ratings for men and women, there should just be one rating for each set of tees regardless of gender. I don't give fiddlers if this means there will be very few women playing off scratch, so what? There should be equality.

prawnsambo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118134878#Comment_118134878

And that's fine too. And it should be decided by women golfers, not men.

I'm just pointing out the implications of that. If people are happy to be getting just two extra shots off 20 to play a course that's 2000 yards longer, that's their choice.

spacecoyote

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118134878#Comment_118134878

I get tye sentiment, but from a practicality perspective, for the sake of equality, how should the course ratings be adjusted, in line with the mens calc method, or the ladies???

ie. Should the reds in my course be changed to a par 72, with a slope of 110 and a course rating of 69 (plucking numbers out of the air here) because its a short par 72 for men, or:

Should the blues be changed to a par 76 with a slope of 140 and a rating of 79 (again arbitrary numbers here) because its a longer than an average LPGA length par 72 for women?

Par72

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135107#Comment_118135107

Why should it be decided by just women? Surely it should be decided by the governing bodies which should have equal representation by both genders.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135172#Comment_118135172

I think the "mens" tees should stay with their current rating and the "womens" tees should be given a rating as though they were "mens" tees. I also don't think there should be holes that are par 4 for men and par 5 for women - so the pars should be the same for everyone.

prawnsambo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135235#Comment_118135235

Because it's a decision that affects women only (based on what you replied to spacecoyote). It has no affect on men whatsoever.

Par72

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135271#Comment_118135271

Surely it affects men because they will now have the option to play in competitions from the forward tees?

prawnsambo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135287#Comment_118135287

Not really if those tees are re-rated for men. If they are not, it would create some strange anomalies where the most forward tees could give you more shots than the next shortest set.

Edit: Castlemartyr for example. Slopes are Red - 132, White - 128, Blue - 131.

Par72

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135514#Comment_118135514

My point was that all tees should be rated and there shouldn't be any difference in rating according to gender.

Seve OB

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118134878#Comment_118134878

agree

exactly what i was trying to say above.

i mean, this lark about how far a lady can hit it compared with a man.... well i can give you countless old lads who cant hit it as far as the average lady so should we change the par of the hole for those guys too?

prawnsambo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135776#Comment_118135776

The point in this particular part of the discussion was who's decision it should be. Since it's now established that it would have no affect whatsoever on men, it should therefore be decided by women.

prawnsambo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135793#Comment_118135793

Well unfortunately (for them) this proposal does not help them in the slightest.

Miley Byrne

I don't get the issue with leaving things as they are. Let's be honest here. Some sports just cannot be played on a level playing field by men and women. It's down to biology. I like seeing women golfers getting to scratch (or low single figures)in my club. This would be next to impossible if women were to play a course solely rated for men. Sometimes people find issues and problems where there are none.

Par72

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135916#Comment_118135916

Well, there wouldn't be much progress for women if the argument of "leave things as they are" was applied to golf and golf clubs.

Handicaps exist for the sole purpose of leveling the playing field. There are plenty of men who are at a biological/physical disadvantage to other men and we don't tell them "you should play off the ladies' tees because you're not as strong".

The fact that you "like seeing women golfers getting to scratch" isn't really a justification for continued inequality. More likely the fragility of the male ego might become even more apparent when some women would have a lower handicap than them if everything was equal.

prawnsambo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118135916#Comment_118135916

Yeah. Whenever I see a 'solution' proposed, I want to know what the exact problem is that this 'solution' proposes to address. In this case, I can't see one.

On the other hand, the WHS should allow more mixed competitions and end the nonsense of separate men's and women's competitions. There are still too few of these around that award prizes based on score and not on gender. Even a halfway house of mixed competitions with separate prizes would be a start.

Rikand

They might have to increase the handicap for women beyond 54 and I'd imagine you could see a lot of women give up golf altogether if they found that their normal 6-7 par 5's were turned into beastly par 4's. On my own course, there would be no par 5's for women at all from their tees if they were rated for a male point of view (unless the committee was feeling generous)

Golf is about enjoyment as much as anything else and if their normal par 75 was turned into a par 69, their chances of making the odd par to give them that lift on a day might just go out the window forever. It's fine to expect it of the ladies who hit a good ball, but the ones that don't could lose the fun and pack it in entirely

Par72

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118139031#Comment_118139031

There's no necessity to increase anyone's handicap beyond 54 man, woman or child. The fact that there is even an option to be a 54 handicap is a joke in my opinion.

There are junior tees set out in my club and I suppose if someone (man, woman or child) isn't able to hit the ball over 100 yards off the tee then maybe playing off those is an option instead of the "ladies" tees.

blue note

It's worth thinking of it the other way around. Imagine if we used the ladies measurements to decide on the par of our courses and then the ladies measurements for course ratings. This could turn courses from the blue tees to par 80s. We'd see occasional par 6s. And the slope ratings would be off the charts. If you are an 10 handicapper and playing from the back tees now gives you a playing handicap of 12 say, I'd be surprised if you weren't getting an extra 5 shots from the back tees. Of course, if your scores were calculated based on your scores from those tees and the ladies ratings, you'd probably be far lower than 10.

Now already when people got into single figures under WHS we had lots of people scoffing at it because they weren't true single figure golfers. Could you imagine the reaction if suddenly everyone from 15 down was now a single figure golfer?

Obviously I've no idea what way the actual numbers would go, but they'd be completely different to what we have now. If we don't think that's fine for us, I don't see how you would think it's fine for the women to change in a similar way.

blue note

I had a look at Tramore, my old course, to see what it would look like if we were to use the ladies criteria to decide on pars. We'd go from a par 72 to a par 80. And comparing to the ladies tee, the average length of a par 3, 4, 5 would go up by 26, 24, 19. So if you were averaging 85 from the blue tees, you would go from averaging +13 to averaging +5. And with that extra length compared to the ladies tees I suspect the course would have a very tough course rating.

So from the ladies point of view the figures would be similar but in reverse. For guys who are averaging in the 70s since it's the best 8 rounds that count their index would probably be mid 70s. So their average score would be around the plus 5 mark. You'd have low single digit golfers suddenly becoming plus 5 and the like. And as for the guys who are currently around the plus 2 mark, they'd surely be getting handicaps of plus 10 and the like.

As I say, if you think this is all fine, then there's no reason the systems can't be merged entirely.

Par72

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118139962#Comment_118139962

It's worth thinking of it the other way round? Why? You certainly don't make any argument to show that to be a worthwhile exercise.

I can't understand why the idea that all golfers' handicaps be calculated on the same basis regardless of their gender is so offensive to some people in this thread.

spacecoyote

I don't think its offensive to anyone, and i think that, on the face of it, everyone agrees with the idea in principal.

The point is though, you're just saying...everyone should play off the same without offering a suggestion on a practical methodology or solution.

I took a look at the winning scores for ladies comps in my place for the last few months. The average is around 34 points, playing of a 5700 yard par 74 with a slope of 132.

What is being suggested is to just line the tees up with a mens calc. That would straight off reduce par to 72, so average winning score down to 32.

Then re calculate the slope, again to align with mens calcs, which will probably drop the slope close to 113. For a 20 handicap, thats about 3 less shots, so brings he winning score down to 29 points (and the average ladies handicap is probably higher than 20 in my place)

So basically, for an average lady member, they'll struggle to break 30 points on their best days. I could see how a lot of people might be put off by that prospect. Handicaps would fo through the roof, which again is a pretty deflating thing to deal with

Par72

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118140702#Comment_118140702

The bit you are not allowing for is that all ladies' handicaps will increase so average winning scores shouldn't change at all.

Presumably, your club has very few women playing in competitions because 34 points wouldn't get in the prizes at all in my club (not that that is of any relevance to the argument anyway).

blue note

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118140607#Comment_118140607

Because I think a lot of people are looking at it without thinking about how they ladies would feel if their handicaps went up by a dozen shots overnight. And if we look at how we'd feel if ours went down by a similar number we might understand a bit better. As we saw with WHS, when people changed by a couple of shots it can jar with people's acceptance of what the handicaps should be. Particularly if it brought someone to single figures or scratch or the like.

In theory, as long as the handicaps are fair, it doesn't make a difference what the number is. So if a guy goes from being an 18 to an 8, it doesn't make a difference as long as his chance of winning in the comps doesn't change. But in reality, we measure ourselves against our handicaps and have milestones engrained in us, like getting below 18, or to single figures or whatever. Changing the system so drastically would require us to reset what are milestones or benchmarks are and people don't want to do that.

And the same is true for the ladies. If we moved them over to the mens measurements and their handicaps shot up overnight they wouldn't accept it. The woman who was trying to keep her handicap below 18 might not be trying to keep it below 30. That would take a long time to sit right with her.

Par72

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118140902#Comment_118140902

Well, you're making a lot of assumptions here. Losing shots off your handicap is very different from gaining shots so that's the first reason your analogy doesn't really work.

You're also assuming how ladies would feel about it and that they wouldn't accept it. The only woman in this thread, as far as I am aware, is me and I would accept it and feel fine about it. Don't assume, through your privileged male perspective, that you can accurately predict the opinions of an entire cohort - especially a cohort that you don't belong to. Did the golfers whose handicaps went up to 54 when the WHS was introduced not accept it? Even if they didn't, it makes no difference, the system is in place.

prawnsambo

I've yet to see a problem that this solution is supposed to fix. And by problem, I mean something that has been clearly identified as causing an anomaly that only this solution will fix.

I've asked two women golfers who I regularly play with if they would like this. At first they thought I was talking about getting more tees rated for women and said yes immediately. When I explained it, they were just flabbergasted. Small sample, I know. But I will continue to ask to see if there is actually any demand for this.

spacecoyote

Ok then, if the analogy doesnt work for you how about if they decided to re rate all courses & slopes based on ratings from the top 20 in the mens OWGR rather than a bogey golfer

So, some of the par 4s will become par 3s , and some of your par 5s will become par 4s. And the slope of the course from all tees will drop because they're likely scoring a lot better on your course than your average handicap golfer.

As a result of that, every golfers handicap is going to go up by 10-20 shots or more. Are you happy with that?

I know i wouldn't be overjoyed if my handicap index jumped from 9 - 18 overnight. Then everyone currently with an index of 34 or higher jumps to 54, and the people in the 40s or 50s currently are capped and have no chance of ever putting in a winning score. And suddenly theres a flood of golfers with 2-3 shots on holes and a round of golf starts to take an hour longer.

In terms of your point above re , after a quick glance, we have 163 female members and the average ladies index is 31.5 in the club, so its a relatively busy ladies membership. I was referencing average scores above, we have comps won with 39-40 points, occasionally, but we've equally had comps won with 32 points. There would be some comps with pretty low entries alright, but its a pretty active membership

Par72

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118141292#Comment_118141292

Well, what is the problem that you are trying to fix by having an extra set of tees rated for women in your club?

The thing I am trying to promote here is equality. The problem I am trying to fix is inequality by having a different course rating depending on one's gender. A golfer's handicap should be determined by their golfing ability, not according to what gender they are.

prawnsambo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118141621#Comment_118141621

That isn't inequality though. Inequality is where a sector of society does not have the same access or rights as another sector. There was serious inequality in golf for decades when women weren't allowed to join golf clubs. There is still some inequality where women don't have the same access to their golf clubs as men do. There is inequality where women don't get to compete in the same competitions as men do when the handicap system allows it.

Would you consider it inequality that women athletes don't compete against male athletes in track and field? In rugby? Soccer?

And the problem I'm trying to fix is choice. Men have a choice of three sets of tees, women, just one.

Par72

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118141711#Comment_118141711

"Would you consider it inequality that women athletes don't compete against male athletes in track and field? In rugby? Soccer?"

No, because as far as I am aware there isn't a handicapping system in track and field, rugby or soccer, is there? No more so than I would expect your average club rugby side to compete against the All Blacks. The handicap system is what levels the field for everyone, and has the potential to do so regardless of gender.

I was starting the back 9 in Clontarf once, when one of the stewards saw me addressing my ball on the ladies tee box. He was straight onto the intercom and called out "Would the gentleman on the ladies' tee please move back to the mens' tee".

I ignored him and completed my pre-shot routine. again, over the intercom "Would the gentleman on the ladies' tee please move back to the mens' tee".

Again I ignored him, double-checked my range finder and stepped up to take my shot. For a third time, and with a bit of venom this time, he called out "Would the gentleman on the ladies' tee please move back to the mens' tee!"

I snapped. I turned and shouted back "will the prick in the clubhouse kindly STFU and let me take my second shot".

prawnsambo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118141753#Comment_118141753

There are actually handicapping systems in place for track and field and other sports in the Paralympics.

And you haven't addressed the point about inequality. Which would bring me back to my original question of what problem this is supposed to fix.

Par72

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118141901#Comment_118141901

Well, I guess we are arguing over what you believe equality to be and what I believe it to be? You see a separate handicapping system for men and women as equality and I do not.

Russman

Let me start by saying I don't care even a tiny bit what tees anyone plays off, one way or the other, play off what you like. I doesn't bother or effect me in the slightest. There's absolutely an argument for players of any gender playing a course yardage to suit their ability.

That said I can't see how courses could be rated fairly or equitably. Wouldn't we end up with a hybrid mish mash where a course is rated too easy for men and too hard for ladies ? As I understand it, and I'm open to correction, the ratings teams look at all the aspects and conditions of a hole, including landing area for tee shots. I appreciate there will be different landing areas between a scratch player and a 20 h/c, but I think (again, open to correction) they base it on a theoretical "bogey golfer" who carries it XX yards. Presumably this notional bogey golfer would be different for men and ladies in terms of their carry distance ? I'd imagine so given the parameters for par 3, 4, 5 are different for each gender. If they used some sort of average I think it would be too short for men and too long for ladies, no ?

I dunno, I've no issue with separate ladies and mens ratings for each set of tees rather than just one set of tees for ladies, that might be easiest, but I think there's more than a whiff of "solution looking for a problem" with this. Sometimes its ok to say that ladies and men are different, I'm almost sure that even in Irish regional PGA events the lady pros play off different tees on certain holes, maybe someone can confirm ?

I just can't see how its workable in practical terms and what benefits there are to it. A bit like a course wanting to increase the par on the card from 69 to 70 but they only way they can do it is by turning a great par 4 into a sh1t par 5.